Debates Can Shift a Race’s Outcome, but It’s Not Easy

WASHINGTON — History shows that candidates have different ways to score through presidential debates: the forceful put-down, the surprising show of skill, the opponent’s fumble, superior post-debate tactics.

But it also shows that to fundamentally alter the direction of a campaign, a candidate usually has to accomplish all of those things.

That underscores the challenge that Mitt Romney faces against President Obama as they approach the first presidential debate of 2012, the 27th of the television era featuring the major party nominees.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan’s avuncular “There you go again” performance reassured Americans that he was not the extremist that President Jimmy Carter had warned about. Reagan’s standing improved after that debate, though the race had already tilted his way and a Gallup study later concluded that the debate was “not likely to have been a determining factor” in his landslide victory.

Photo

OCT. 13, 2004 Senator John Kerry and President George W. Bush after their final debate, in Tempe, Ariz. Mr. Kerry’s strong debate performance was not enough to win.Credit
Jim Bourg/Reuters

Four years before, President Gerald R. Ford blundered by asserting, “There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe.” Trailing Mr. Carter, the Democratic nominee, by double-digit margins before their three debates, Mr. Ford made up ground after the debates but went on to lose the popular vote by two percentage points.

Only twice have debates appeared to shift the election’s outcome. The first time was in 1960, when Americans first saw presidential candidates debate on television.

Senator John F. Kennedy, whose crisp, cool demeanor contrasted with Vice President Richard M. Nixon’s haggard appearance, moved from being even in the Gallup Poll to four percentage points ahead by the last debate, on Oct. 21. Gallup later concluded that the candidates’ four encounters that year “could very well have accounted” for Kennedy’s narrow victory, though the closeness of the contest and a dearth of other polling at the time make a definitive conclusion difficult.

The clearest shift from the debates came in the 2000 race, pitting Gov. George W. Bush of Texas against Vice President Al Gore. It resulted from a rare combination of factors, with devastating cumulative effects on Mr. Gore’s campaign.

Mr. Gore entered the first encounter, on Oct. 3, with a reputation as a strong debater and with a lead of five percentage points among likely voters in a New York Times/CBS News poll. “We weren’t all that far from where Romney is now,” Jan van Lohuizen, a pollster for Mr. Bush, recalled last week.

But Mr. Gore’s skill at jousting became overshadowed by minor factual misstatements and what appeared as a condescending, impatient demeanor — especially after Mr. Bush’s aides called attention to them in post-debate interviews.

“They beat us after the debate in the spin room,” said Tad Devine, a strategist for Mr. Gore. “Their spin was, ‘He lied and he sighed,’ and that took hold.”

It got worse when Mr. Bush’s running mate, Dick Cheney, bested Mr. Gore’s No. 2, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, in the vice-presidential debate. In the second presidential face-off, Mr. Gore responded with what was widely judged to be an ineffectual performance.

Then, in their final debate, on Oct. 17, Mr. Gore overcompensated again — seeking to discomfit Mr. Bush by approaching him onstage. With a nod of greeting and an easy grin, Mr. Bush made Mr. Gore appear foolish.

Other errors by the Gore campaign during those two weeks, which included poor makeup for one debate that gave Mr. Gore an orange tint, helped Mr. Bush gain a strong edge in polls for “likability.” Daron Shaw, a political scientist at the University of Texas, called the result a “wave effect” that lifted the Republican ticket.

Photo

OCT. 21, 1960 Senator John F. Kennedy, whose cool demeanor was an advantage on TV, and Vice President Richard M. Nixon in their last debate, in New York.Credit
Associated Press

The wave left Mr. Bush with a lead of one percentage point among likely voters in the post-debate New York Times/CBS poll — a net swing of six percentage points in his direction. In surveys by NBC News/Wall Street Journal and by Gallup, the swing was 9 and 12 percentage points.

If not for that shift, veterans of both campaigns say, Mr. Bush would not have been in position to eke out his Electoral College victory.

“The pivot point of the election,” Mr. Devine said. He still regrets the campaign’s inability to shape news coverage of the first debate, saying that “we should have fought back harder” with a message that if Mr. Gore sighed, “so did America.”

Even the most gifted political communicators have found debates an uneven terrain.

Reagan cemented his telegenic reputation by closing his lone 1980 confrontation with Mr. Carter with a question for voters: “Are you better off than you were four years ago?”

“We were headed for victory” anyway, said Ken Khachigian, who was Reagan’s speechwriter. But the strong performance “accelerated” Reagan’s momentum, he said, “maybe turning a very strong victory into a landslide.”

Video

Presidential Debate Moments

Sam Tanenhaus, editor of the Book Review, talks about some of the most memorable presidential debate moments of the televised era.

Four years later, Reagan’s Democratic challenger, Walter F. Mondale, gained the upper hand in their first debate. Steady and incisive, Mr. Mondale saw his poll ratings surge while Reagan, then 73, came across as fumbling and outmatched.

Reagan’s performance quickly triggered commentary — too much, in the Mondale campaign’s view — about whether he was too old to be president. “That hurt us a lot,” said Maxine Isaacs, Mr. Mondale’s press secretary, by creating conditions for a backlash in the president’s favor.

In the next debate, Reagan declared, “I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.” Mr. Mondale, then 56, laughed along — and concluded that his chance of erasing Reagan’s lead had vanished.

“I said to myself, this is probably over now,” Mr. Mondale said. He ultimately carried one state, his native Minnesota.

Mr. Mondale sees both possibility and risk in Mr. Romney’s quest to seize voters’ attention. The imperative for aggression collides with the need to show respect for a personally popular incumbent.

“These debates are the one chance to change how they look at him, and how they look at Obama,” Mr. Mondale said.

The lesson of his own experience? “That’s a high hill to climb.”

A version of this article appears in print on October 1, 2012, on Page A13 of the New York edition with the headline: Using Debates to Turn Electoral Tide Is Difficult But Not Impossible. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe